Australia considers banning new migrants from living in largest citiesGovernment wants to limit number of immigrants to Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane

Australia is considering banning some new migrants from living in its largest cities for “at least a few years”, a government minister has said.

Alan Tudge, the minister for cities, urban infrastructure and population, said his government wants to limit the number of immigrants to Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane in order to reduce congestion in the country’s three biggest cities.

Alan Tudge, the minister for cities, urban infrastructure and population, said his government wants to limit the number of immigrants to Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane in order to reduce congestion in the country’s three biggest cities.

The new plan would affect the roughly 40 per cent of migrants who have the desired skills and are looking for work on arrival.

It would class five cities – Darwin, Perth, Hobart, Adelaide and Canberra – as regional centres for migrants to settle in.

“We aim to ease the population pressure off the three big cities and more rapidly grow the smaller states and regions,” Mr Tudge said during a speech in Melbourne.

The minister did not provide details on how the policy would be enforced, but said it could include incentives.

“You can also put conditions on people’s visas as well to stay in a particular area for at least a few years,” he said.

But he said some categories of immigrants would be exempt from geographic blocks.

Migrants who were sponsored by employers would be able to work where employers need them and those on family reunion visas, typically a foreigner marrying an Australian, would also be free to live where they chose, he added.

There are currently no limits on where people can settle after they receive a skilled migrant visa.

Immigration is expected to be a major issue in Australia’s next federal election, due before May 2019.

A ReachTel poll published in September found 63 per cent of Sydney residents surveyed said they supported restrictions on the number of migrants moving to Australia’s biggest city.

True & Honest Fan

kiwifarms.net

But if we got rid of borders, world GDP would double in a year. Why do you hate money so much? Your car is Chinese, your food is German, your fridge is Mexican, your airplane is Saudi Arabian, and your wife is an Aboriginal. Get. Over. It. Already.

AKA - We've let in too many people to our cities and now they're overfilled. So instead of recognising we need to ease up on migration in general and let infrastructure catch up. We'll just ship the problem to other cities.
Get lost. We don't have any jobs over here either. You've stuffed up your cities and we don't want the same issue happening here.

True & Honest Fan

But if we got rid of borders, world GDP would double in a year. Why do you hate money so much? Your car is Chinese, your food is German, your fridge is Mexican, your airplane is Saudi Arabian, and your wife is an Aboriginal. Get. Over. It. Already.

Click to expand...

Australia is one of the most unfriendly countries for expats. Oz makes a ton of money off foreign workers through brutal tyrannical taxes that buttfucks anyone stupid enough to work for a company that sends them to Australia for any sort of work.

So I’m thinking this is another effort for Australia to make more money off foreign workers. I wouldn’t read too much into this.

Australia and its cities are empty. Sydney (metropolitan area) has 5 million people, but they are spread out over large area. Population density is whopping 1000 people/km^2. Sounds like a lot, right? Nah. New York City is 10,000 people/km^2. Cairo is 19,000/km^2. Paris and Mumbai (megacity) are 21,000/km^2. Australia has fewer people than the state of Texas and covers almost as much land as the "lower 48".

20% is most. Where did you learn to math? Australia? Lower 48 states are 5% desert. Nearly a quarter of the North American continent is covered by mountains. This idea that Australia is somehow worse off is silly nonsense, I say.

20% is most. Where did you learn to math? Australia? Lower 48 states are 5% desert. Nearly a quarter of the North American continent is covered by mountains. This idea that Australia is somehow worse off is silly nonsense, I say.

Desert has an actual geographic meaning based on precipitation. Mostly implies more than half at a minimum. Most of Australia is not desert. It is habitable (even if semi-arid), but people have no reason to live there because low population means no pressure to move away from a few "large" metropolitan areas.

Compare Australia to other parts of the world (say like 'round the equator) where larger populations force people to make use of mesic and even xeric lands.

>"Australia considers banning new migrants from living in largest cities"

>"the minister for cities wants to limit the number of immigrants to Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane...", "The new plan would affect the roughly 40 per cent of migrants..."

[thinking emoji]

They already incentivise immigrants to move to regional cities like Woollongong or Sheparton; all this proposition amounts to is pretty much just tweaking those policies. (Not that I think it's very likely to happen- sounds more like a "throw it out there and see how people react" thing)

An actual complete and total shutdown of all immigration to Melbourne and Sydney (like the headline implies) would never fly with either of the mainstream Australian parties.

If policies like that produced votes in Australia, One Nation and/or Australia First would be credible threats to the two party system, instead of irrelevant novelty acts, taken about as seriously than the Greens (probly less tbh).

I was reading about this yesterday. The other side of the argument is idiots who want to increase the populations of Sydney and Melbourne to around 8 million. Some idiot made the argument that 30% of people in Sydney now live in apartments so increasing population density is cool. The fact that many don't live in apartments by choice seems to have become irrelevant.

True & Honest Fan

If this ban comes through it's got to be the whole of Victoria and most of New South Wales, not gonna do shit if migrants bypass this by moving to Newcastle or Wollongong and working in Sydney.

Click to expand...

that was my first thought... won't it just push them out into rural and suburban areas? cosmopolitan city dwellers are the ones who want these people in western countries to begin with. why shouldn't they be the ones who have to deal with them?

Let's not forget Australia was originally inhabited by abbos and prisoners presumably because normal people didn't want to live there. Maybe saying inhospitable desert is not technically accurate but they still have a point.

True & Honest Fan

that was my first thought... won't it just push them out into rural and suburban areas? cosmopolitan city dwellers are the ones who want these people in western countries to begin with. why shouldn't they be the ones who have to deal with them?

Click to expand...

You've already got a heap of people who commute from the mountains or the Central Coast and it's driven housing costs up dramatically on the Central Coast in particular. Sydney proper already has a problem with inadequate infrastructure and pushing more people north or south will just expand that problem to the regional areas within commuting distance.

I'm also skeptical of the claimed skills shortages. Even if they do exist, there's plenty of time to train/retrain current citizens before the Boomer bulge hits full stride. If you try to solve the problem through immigration, you're going to be stuck with the increased population density long after the last Boomer is dead.

True & Honest Fan

kiwifarms.net

I fully support sending all those poor Sub-Saharan African refugees to Canberra for "at least a few years". Not the other cities, though. They can stay the fuck away from my city. They've already turned our nightlife area into a fight club so bad that all of my cop friends and most of my other friends won't go there on weekends anymore.

Desert has an actual geographic meaning based on precipitation. Mostly implies more than half at a minimum. Most of Australia is not desert. It is habitable (even if semi-arid), but people have no reason to live there because low population means no pressure to move away from a few "large" metropolitan areas.

Compare Australia to other parts of the world (say like 'round the equator) where larger populations force people to make use of mesic and even xeric lands.

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. These people are commonly referred to as Lolcows and are each distinct thanks to their erratic public behavior. Spectators are encouraged to join discussion. The wealth of opinions and knowledge shared by users is what has enabled this peculiar fringe community to thrive despite the incredible adversity and contention brought by those we discuss.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.